Let nobody get this Community Website into trouble

[robertec]

I had second thoughts about highlighting this article less I be seen as fanning the situation, but it is only right that fellow forumers who have missed it are made totally aware of the consequences

http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news.php?id=104205

[Ski]

A very timely warning to us too.

Thankz

[Timo]

It's actually sad reading that article because for me at least, the internet is the last frontier when it comes to allowing freedom of speech, and now that too is taking a beating. It is so blatantly obvious nowadays that we can't even say a tiny little thing without being slapped with idiotic terms like 'racial sensitivity', yet are we all supposed bend over and say go ahead? Are we supposed to rejoice at the fact that intellectually the situation is going to become more sterile and bleak?

My principle is that I should be able to say anything I want to, whenever I want to. It's of no one else's concern what I say or think. Certainly not some politician who is supposed to represent us but instead closes us down while on the side steal our money.

A forum is only worth fighting for if the people are allowed to add value to it.

[Virgilce]

It's actually sad reading that article because for me at least, the internet is the last frontier when it comes to allowing freedom of speech, and now that too is taking a beating. It is so blatantly obvious nowadays that we can't even say a tiny little thing without being slapped with idiotic terms like 'racial sensitivity', yet are we all supposed bend over and say go ahead? Are we supposed to rejoice at the fact that intellectually the situation is going to become more sterile and bleak?

My principle is that I should be able to say anything I want to, whenever I want to. It's of no one else's concern what I say or think. Certainly not some politician who is supposed to represent us but instead closes us down while on the side steal our money.

A forum is only worth fighting for if the people are allowed to add value to it.

Hi Timo...valued added forum ? at times, is it difficult to justify ? Like what I have done about Name imitation and flying of yellow card, some responded some say gabbage.some say not concerned....but to me, it was a valued topic because I pour it out about how I feel man. Cheers :)

[tan_r]

My principle is that I should be able to say anything I want to, whenever I want to. It's of no one else's concern what I say or think.
Of course, it isn't anyone's concern what you say or think in private but when you do so publicly, it is a different matter. It comes with consequences which you should be prepared to take responsibility for.

[KH EE]

for those who missed the earlier "anwar" issue, do read the related thread here:-
http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showthread.php?t=5750

Per JO, "I was told statements have been taken by the authorities from a total of 8 people, including those who made demands in the newspapers."

looks like it's very dangerous to air one's grievances in public, including kopitiam talk...

[aroki]

If we say/write sensible stuff, there is no issue to fear. We should not be frighten to speak our mind as long as it reasonable for public viewing. If it is not, than as adults, we need to face the actions for it. But getting frighten by threats that ISA or sedition act will be use thus limiting what we say is chickening out and bowing to people who don't want to see a meaningful discussion going on. What they want?? say that so and so is doing a great job when he is not, what they going do in this case when it is not true..send you to kamunting. Msian are easily threatened..we need to value our freedom of speech. if we are too scared...stay at home, kill the website and start talking to ourselves.

some issues maybe sensitive but that doesn't mean that we can't discuss it. If no discussion takes place, doesn't mean it will go away. Talking about it and agreeing on the solutions is the way to go about. That is what forums etc are there for. There is nothing that says our minister can talk about it and we can't..why? are they smarter than all of us...some of them talk lots of bull and more bull than a lowyer buruk.We should stand for our rights, whether it is in kopitiam or web forum..what they are going to do, go to all kopitiams and catch everyone..if they can, than they should catch all the snatch thieves around town.

Moreover sensitivity is also very subjective and one person meat is another person's poison. So lets speak without fear or favour and use our common sense, give as well as accept opinions and don't feel that we are always right jus cos we have PhD or MBA or Nogotouniversity..we can learn from from each other in the process and hopefully be friends. :cool:

[kwchang]

It may interest some of you, especially keroncong_asli who posted 2 hyperlinks to that website in our thread on the topic "Is Hang Tuah A Chinese ?". Please note that I had visited the site and found it highly controversial and I did post a warning against picking any comments verbatim from that site and posting to our threads.

That is the very same website that is now closed.

Any one of you can stand on a soapbox and demand your rights to free speech. If you think America is free, think again. The USA is one country that practices "politically correct" statements because somebody in the audience can sue you for derogatory remarks. Same thing we are practising here. My point is that there is no absolute freedom, anywhere on Earth. Especially in a multiracial community, we need to be sensitive.

Jeff has already made his point in the thread on "Why is Bumiputra being categorised as racial breakdown" and I repeat it here for those new or those who wish to forget -
"I will do everything I can as the founder of this community portal to protect the sanctity of this e-space. We will not let the last 5 years' effort go down the drain."

That is the one main reason for the tight moderation.

[yablato]

msc status in a censored form?

yab lato :confused:

[keroncong_asli]

Robertec,

Clarence Quote :-
Are you speaking on your own capacity or on behalf of the USJ 23 neighbourhood watch since the logo is displayed?
__________________________________________________ _

Unfortunately, there was no clarification from you.
As indicated, you are one of usj.com.my Moderators. At the same time, you use USJ 23 ‘Pengawasan Sejiranan Neighbourhood Watch’ Logo beside your name ‘Robert’.

In line with your phrase, “Let nobody get this Community Website into trouble’, could you kindly explain :-

Why are you wearing two caps ?
What does that logo denote in usj.com.my forum ?
Are you spokesman for USJ 23 residents when you sign into this forum?

[clfoo]

Why are you wearing two caps ?
What does that logo denote in usj.com.my forum ?
Are you spokesman for USJ 23 residents when you sign into this forum?

keroncong_asli, not sure what are you trying to achieve on insisting on an answer from Robertec.

IMHO, you see him wearing two caps because he is really wearing two caps.

The way I look at it, if someone got an AAM stickers on his car and driving to work as a Manager at Proton ShahAlam and chat with his friend at a coffee shop nearby. That mean he is talking on his behalf and nothing to do with AAM or Proton. Anybody view it differently?

[tan_r]

Anybody view it differently?
It depends on how petty you are and how you want to view it, that's all.

[jeffooi]

Keroncong_asli,

From your words, I sense you are getting personal in dealing with Robertec.

Robertec is a Moderator for one of our Forum channels. Besides, he is also particularly our liaison with Jawatankuasa Penduduk that's in charge of community affairs in our neighbourhood. Being a Moderator of our Forum channel, he enjoys the privilege of the <b>Moderator</b> title bestowed upon in all channels in this forum.

At the same time, Robertec is recognised by the precinct he comes from, ie USJ23. He owns a property there, and the residents there - over 200households - accept and regard him as their community leader - not by appointment, but by annual election. Hence, he enjoys the privilege of using the USJ23 logo wherever he goes online.

In other words, Robertec is bona fide as ( 1 ) a USJ.com.my Forum Moderator; ( 2 ) a USJ23 community leader; ( 3 ) a JKP Zone 3 representative.

That's the kind of community recognition and privilege he has <b>earned</b> for himself. We admire that as it is a testimony of how a person has carried himself with poise to be accepted and accorded respect by the community he is thrivingly a part of.

Net net, I still maintain that we need to be mindful of the basics of community living. It's the people who make the community.

My offer of buying you <i>teh tarik</i> and to get to know Robertec the next Friday still stands.

[keroncong_asli]

We are not here to dispute Robertec's achievements.
Honestly, I'm indeed proud and appreciative of his unselfish & earnest contribution to Society. If he stands for the next General Election, my vote will go to him for his endeavours in serving the public. No doubt about it.

However, no one has answered as to why an individual is allowed to use a Logo that belongs to a Community, in this case NW 23 Logo appearing in Usj.com forum. Has he got an approval from his residents?

As an example, if I'm working in YB Datuk Seri Lim Keng Yaik's Ministry, can I use the Dept's Logo in this website? OK, one may say yes, provided I get approval from my Boss. But what does that logo signifies in this forum? To instill fear?

Because precedence of others, I'm afraid one fine day this forum will be flooded with Logos. Please be sensible in using an Official Logo. at the right place, right time and proper occassion.

Jeff, thanks, I'll consider meeting up if Friday is not taken up.

[robertec]

keroncong_asli

In answer to your questions,

Had Clarence posted the same question in another thread, I would have been more than please to clarify. So why did I choose not to? very simple really, I did not want to participate in that particular thread and an answer would have been seen as encouragement.

Similarly, a rebuttal to what you said about me would have been no different.

I find that once a point has been made there is actually no need to continue with the argument. Life is not about scoring points and there are just times when it is worthy to just walk away. Why win/lose an argument and lose a potential friend?

Like they say, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words? they never hurt me.”

1) I am a moderator, and I try to help where I can, I posted in thread 6001 because I thought that it was unfair as the Raya Holidays was just around the corner and we had to torture poor kwchang by making him go through each and every thread in this forum during this time. Remember what kwchang said?
”I am only doing my job - and it doesn't pay. Thanks”. Come on man give the guy a break. I also did not want anyone to get this website into trouble.

2) Yes, I am a Star Trek fan, that’s why I have a combadge (to communicate with Captain Janeway and 7 of 9) and I quote a phrase from Tuvok a Vulcan on board the Starship Voyager. - “Live long and prosper”

3) My own phrase as a resident of USJ23 – Live in USJ23

4) The Neighbourhood Watch Logo does not represent USJ23 (we have our own version, just visit our website www.usj23.com and see for yourself). The logo represents all the Neighbourhood Watch Communities in USJ; it is hyperlinked to the Nwatch Website of which I am a Co-Administrator. The logo is our statement that we at www.nwatch.net.my give our full support to Jeff Ooi’s www.usj.com.my website. Our postings here are testaments of our support.

5) If you don’t know who Stone Cold is, well he was a former WWE wrestler turned General Manager. He drinks beer and focks fear, and that’s the bottom line.

So there you have it, my interests are quite varied and some are not as intellectually stimulating as one would wish, but then again, I am but a simple guy.

Hopefully, this clears all the doubts in your mind. Should you have any other, just let me know and I will make further clarification.

Oh, just in case I forget, I speak for myself as a member of this forum and as a member of this here Community.

[chsum]

Keroncong_asli, using a right logo in a forum do not instill fear but to increase the credibility of his posting.
If u are staying in USJ, u should know JKP representative, Neighbour watch group and usj.com.my are the frontliner of our usj community. JKP is our representative to talk to our government (state), NW is our action group (army) and usj.com.my is our voice (loud speaker) to the world, they all work hand in hand to make this a better place for us to stay, I hope now u will see why he can put that logo there as u say "at the right place, right time and proper occassion".

If he put up a political party logo or some redical group logo, thats a different story.

My 2 sens

[keroncong_asli]

Robertec,
Appreciate & thanks for your explanation.

Point (4) is relevant.
A visit to www.usj23.com exhibited similar Logo, therefore one may construe it to be USJ 23 logo. Even a child will swear to it.

My point is : an Official Logo that belongs to a Community should not randomly appear next to one's name in a forum, that's wrong ! However if it's for sale, you can buy and paste it on your vehicle, etc.

What will become of usj.com forum if everyone active in JKP, RA, NW, RT etc etc uses logos after their names? Is this a way to uplift one's ego?

robertec's Quote :-
...... but then again, I am but a simple guy.

Yes, you are a simple guy to call others 'Mischievous'

Wake up my friend, every dog has its day.
To err is human, to forgive divine.

[jeffooi]

With your last posting, Keroncong_Asli, I have no doubt that you are getting
personal on your questioning of Robertec.

I hope this polemic ends here.

[clarence]

Dear All,

I love this web site, I would not like people to abuse the privilege of this forum and also to get Jeff in trouble. This site is for the developement of USJ and critic should be for the betterment and not destroying peoples kind contributions.

A lot of us here are wearing many hats. We should be very of displaying the logo. Unless permission is given by the respective organisation, otherwise the forumer will think that it is the view of the organisation concern because of the display of logo.

If I am a Lato, a president of an NGO, an AAM member, financial advisor PIBG member. so can I too display all the logo, In my opinion, is a definite NO. I am just a visitor to this site and I must respect Jeff good office otherwise should things go wrong, then Jeff and me will be in real trouble.

My due respect to Robertec , In my opinion, he by all means use the logo at his neighbourhood web site of which he is in authority. I don't think it is appropriate at this web site, unless statement make by him had the approval of his neighbourhood committees.

Remember the USJ 2 drain issue?

[keroncong_asli]

Jeff,
Thanks for your advice.
Hope to see you & Robertec next Friday.

[jeffooi]

We must tell Orchipalar what food to bring on First Friday... :)

[isarahim]

With all due respect for your efforts KW, the reason why I have stopped posting in this forum - as I have told you - is because not only did you erase those postings which had lots of rude and insensitive remarks, but you also erased a complete thread. People providing sensible and educated postings are putting in as much effort in their postings as you are doing moderating. You threw out the babies with the tubwater.


If you think America is free, think again. The USA is one country that practices "politically correct" statements because somebody in the audience can sue you for derogatory remarks.
This is, I have to say, completely and utterly wrong. As long as you do not engage in personal attacks and generally keep to decent ethics you can say whatever you want to say in the US. Same in Canada. Same in most of Europe. That they recently have reelected their worst president for decades has nothing to do with the lack of freedoom. Muslims and other religions can have their own magazines and dailys, do any kind of open charity work, their own TV shows etc. Most importantly, racism is illegal, even though the implementation has taken many years to bear fruit, and there are still lots of issues, e.g. within the police force.

While I agree in Jeff's and your point that playing with words just to jazz up a thread title is not what this discussion needs, I'd like to emphasise the fundamental role which forums like this play with educated and sensible discussions. These discussions should be allowed to go on as long as they are just that; educated and sensible, and hence, for instance, no personal attacks or rude words.

The US is a country with elements of racism, but the constitution is perfectly clear; racism is illegal. Same in the UK. Same in Russia.

Malaysia, on the other hand, is a country with elements of racism inscribed into the constitution and its laws. This is an element of eternal sensitivity, not the least because Islam is Malaysia's state religion, and in Islam any form of racism is illegal. So the constitution of Malaysia is, no matter whether you wish to pretend otherwise or not, fundamentally at odds with the words of God. This is the overarching sensitivity which dwarfes all others. If it is not discussed and come to terms with it will be a sore point in the society forever.

One of the central disagreements between Jews and Muslims, for instance, is that Jews claim that God has told them that they are "God's chosen people". This is something which is totally rejected by Islam, not only encompassing Jews, but all races. As Prophet Mohammed put it: "every human being is as equal as the teeth of a comb".

Those which claim that discussing the Bumiputera priviliges is too sensitive are themselves living in a state of pretending, in effect saying that because of this or that historical reason we are allowed to go against the words of God. However we cannot live in this state of pretention forever. As long as the Bumiputera privilige element is there we will.

So what do you do as both Muslim and Malaysian? Do you keep quiet to satisfy the politicus but remain in breach of your belief or do you follow Islam?

What I have seen in many cases in this forum is that the moderators, by their statements and actions, have served to defend racism. Even educated, sensible and well put statements from many posters, criticising racism, have been purged or ridiculed. I agree that there also have been a few really rude and nasty ones, and they deserve obliteration, but the other postings should not be purged with them.

<font color="red"><font size="+1">To Isarahim:</font>

<b><font face="georgia">You have articulated your personal views and beliefs and you seem convicted to impose them unto others - the cyber community here - what you personally, religiously believed in.

This conflicts with what your preach. Civilly speaking, you don't walk your talk. You want the community to comply with your individuality. You worship more of " I " than " WE ".

In other words, you hold us to ransom.

You signed off by saying:</font></b>


Isa Rahim will not post in this forum anymore until two conditions are met:
1. No attempts for thought control or any other form of censorship, including the removal of threads.
2. No implying that defending racism is 'civilised' and criticising it is 'uncivilised'.

<b><font face="georgia">Being our guest in this web forum, you think you should be the one who sets conditions and pre-conditions?

We are going to disappoint you. Because

( 1 ) As a civil community, we were born into a <a href="http://www.malaysianinterfaithnetwork.net/rnegara.htm">post-1969 common ground</a>, and hence we adhere to, among two others:

a ) <i>Keluhuran Perlembagaan </i>
b ) <i>Kedaulatan Undang-undang </i>
c ) <i>Kesopanan dan Kesusilaan</i>

(Go ask your kids where these three tenets came from, if you don't already know.)

( 2 ) We would not be doing our job as Moderators/Administrators of this Web Forum if we

a ) allow chaos to triumph over racial harmony (that renders your Condition One invalid)
b ) allow you to UNILATERALLY imply that we - the Moderators and Administrators - are implying that <i>"defending racism is 'civilised' and criticising it is 'uncivilised'</i> (that renders your Condition Two equally invalid).

Why?

Because, Isarahim, you and us are <B>NOT</B> too indispensible when racial harmony and the larger good of the Malaysian Society still remains an option.

Will we miss you? Will you miss us?

You bet!</b></font></font>

[robertec]

It is alright keroncong_alsi, when you need to know you really need to know.

Here is the actual USJ23 Logo..


http://www.usj23.com/images/usj23a.gif

Just for your added knowledge, I am also the webmaster of the USJ23 Community Website and the designer of the USJ23 Logo.

See you, come Friday 3rd of December or has it been changed to next week?

[keroncong_asli]

Robertec,
Whatever USJ 23 Logo looks like, Clarance and I don't understand why you need to use Neighbourhood Watch's Logo beside your name? Perhaps you could explain clearly when we meet up one day. I'm tired of discussing this subject and would like to call it a day. Thanks

Isarahim,
You are one of the remaining few who write intelligently. A man of wisdom, without 'Fear or Favour'. Keep it up.

Jeff,
Satish owes me a drink, you can replace your teh-tarik with a bucket of KFC. Thanks in advance. Btw, have you pack your winter clothing for the Harvard thingy?

<font size="+1">JEFF says:</font>

Yo... Can have two teh tarik for the road what? :D

Winter clothing is ever ready (Boston must be, what, 3 ~ 5 degrees Celcius now?)

I am still struggling with my talking points. I haven't met my Iranian brother <a href="http://hoder.com/weblog/">Hossein Derakhshan</a> (Hoder) in person but we are supposed to lead a group of international bloggers in a themed discussion. Nervous <i>lah</i>.

BTW... Get a copy of Star In-Tech this Tuesday. And more details later. :)

[ginaphan]

Isarahim: glad to see you making posts. Your silence has been deafening.

[keroncong_asli]

Jeff,
I like http://www.stop.censoring.us/
It's an alternative news source for Iranian.
Hoder blog looks clean & neat. Easier to search for links.
Wow! they have Persian girls too. When will we have 'Malaysian Girls'?

OK-lah a drink will do. After drinking the 'Super' tongkat Ali flavor, I'll go for either robertec, kwchang or you to test it's strength. Get ready-man. Belum cuba belum tahu.

Bring extra tissues to clean your fingers after thumb prints. Don't worry about winter as blizzard in N.E. had not set in yet.

I saw your handsome face in Computime (or Intech ?) recently.
Safe flight to Boston and come back in one piece.

[kwchang]

Just in case people are wondering about our response to isarahim's challenge, do go back to post number 428 above and read what Jeff has commented directly as an addendum to isarahim's post.

As to why
Even educated, sensible and well put statements from many posters, criticising racism, have been purged or ridiculed. I agree that there also have been a few really rude and nasty ones, and they deserve obliteration, but the other postings should not be purged with them
I am sorry if the good ones get thrown out with the bad because I had taken the quick way out in clearing the offending threads. I note that you had agreed that the "nasty ones" deserve obliteration :)

[isarahim]

Jeff,

I do not have the power to intrude on other's postings, but even if I had, I would not. Anyway, here is my reply:

You have articulated your personal views and beliefs and you seem convicted to impose them unto others - the cyber community here - what you personally, religiously believed in.
Expressing your views can never be imposing. That goes for both you and me. Everyone is free to agree or not. If they don't I'm open to discuss. And the forum should also be supportive of such discussion.

This conflicts with what your preach. Civilly speaking, you don't walk your talk. You want the community to comply with your individuality. You worship more of " I " than " WE ".
In what sense do I not follow my views? I do in every word. Please point to a specific instance. I do not have a single personal gain in expressing these views. But I feel it's needed. Many other's share the same views but hold them by themselves. Pious kampung people refuse to make use of priviligies because they feel the same thing. Foreign Muslim scholars have pointed it out repeatedly. This is not an issue for you and me. It's an issue for the country. Racial harmony will always be on shaky ground unless the issue is settled.

<b><FONT COLOR="RED">JEFF SAYS: I refer in particular to the portion immediately before this.</font></b>


in Islam any form of racism is illegal. So the constitution of Malaysia is, no matter whether you wish to pretend otherwise or not, fundamentally at odds with the words of God. This is the overarching sensitivity which dwarfes all others. If it is not discussed and come to terms with it will be a sore point in the society forever.

<b><FONT COLOR="RED">From your words, you spoke from a Muslim's individual view, and I, as a non-Muslim, have my reservation over what you have said and what I perceived you have imposed on me with your onorous statement.

There are many of the likes of you, and many of the likes of me in this cyber-space. If the many likes of YOU were to argue PUBLICLY in this Web Forum with the many likes of ME, there will be no end to conflict of perspectives coming from many YOUs and many MEs.

No, this is not the chosen path when we first set up this community portal.

Because, all of us - no matter how diverse we are genetically and religiously - have our common grounds.

One of the common grounds is for us to respect each other's value system and to keep it to the inner sanctum of each other's thoughts. We respect mutually, we don't cross impose. It is still an option for the larger good.

It is my wish to uphold this common ground, and it is from this common ground that I said you didn't walk your talk.

Let me repeat: You want the community to comply with your individuality. You worship more of " I " than " WE".

But if you want to change the Malaysian Constitution for all that you believe in - as you have implied that Malaysian Constitution is against the "Words of God", please don't make a sermon out of this web forum.

Please go elsewhere. This ain't the forum, the platform nor the target audience to fight your fight.

BTW, Don't call this intrusion if you resort to semantics. I chose to answer you here as I want the context to be as clear as it can be in the eyes of our readers.</b></font>


Being our guest in this web forum, you think you should be the one who sets conditions and pre-conditions?
As regards when and where I wish to post, yes.

a ) Keluhuran Perlembagaan
b ) Kedaulatan Undang-undang
c ) Kesopanan dan Kesusilaan
I subscribe to these as much as you do. And may I ask what is the conflict? To discuss a law is not breaking it. Every law needs to be discussed. Laws are discussed and improved all the time. New Acts, with revisions to previous Acts, are tabled and approved every year.

a ) allow chaos to triumph over racial harmony (that renders your Condition One invalid)
With this statement you are equating 'chaos' with 'educated and sensible' discussion. It's not. I have never said 'no moderation'.

b ) allow you to UNILATERALLY imply that we - the Moderators and Administrators - are implying that "defending racism is 'civilised' and criticising it is 'uncivilised' (that renders your Condition Two equally invalid).
This was in direct reference with the statement made when one particular thread was purged. Most of that thread had indeed been a civilised discussion. But it was dismissed as being uncivilised, just because a few people misbehaved. I think KWChangs response earlier is very much appreciated and right on the point.

Because, Isarahim, you and us are NOT too indispensible when racial harmony and the larger good of the Malaysian Society still remains an option.
No one is indispensible, but anyone add his/her piece in contributing to the future of our country. Racism is ugly in all its guises.

[keroncong_asli]

Web-Master Quote :- I have also put a context to the issue of Bumiputra. I asked what's the point of debating 'Bumiputra' when this is already cast in stone in the Federal Constitution? Wanna start a revolution using this community forum? I said, think again!

Web-Master Quote :- My last word: I will do everything I can as the founder of this community portal to protect the sanctity of this e-space. We will not let the last 5 years' effort go down the drain.

Moderator Quote :- I suggest we stop adding to this thread and let it drop off the forum naturally. thank you

Moderator Quote :- I think that it is rather mischievous that XXXXXX deliberately highlight this particular sentence ...........

Moderator Quote :- Let me remind you of our rules (click on the Rules above in our banner) and I see XXXXX has violated Rule 2a. I think a tinge of yellow is appropriate for K_Asli at the moment.

Moderator Quote :- I am only doing my job - and it doesn't pay.
__________________________________________________ _______

After a span of 5 years, I personally feel that the Web-Master and Moderators need to sit down collectively to review it's old Rules & Regulation. To be an effective e-Community, one has to take into consideration the needs of social and community changes that fits this forum comfortably.

Aptly, Sex, religion and business are forbidden. Since BUMIPUTRA is a sensitive words to usj.com, I strongly suggest that any thread about Bumiputra should be immediately taken-off at the first sighting. Although we do not agree to this ban, it'll at least keep Moderators happy with their objective of running this forum.

A thread cannot be drop off naturally unless stringent measures are adhered to.Think of a better way to handle this matter. Either you take the entire thread off or let it die a natural death gradually. No need to pop-in with a reminder.

To avoid frequent off-track discussion by forumers, Moderator/s should strictly enforce to Rule 1 (a) as follows :- Discussion threads also go off track when people decide to start chatting. If you want to have a chat session, do it with the Private Messaging (PM) system provided or communicate by email or other chat/messaging applications on the Internet.

Moderator/s should adhere to Rule 2 (g) : the Moderator/administrator may provide guidance (in a public post) to the member to further develop a practical sense of what is appropriate and what is not allowed. Therefore, Moderator/s being a role model in society should be diplomatic, courteous and have good manners. They must be careful with their words when advising a forumer/s.

ECommunity of usj.com is not a football match. Unless it amend its Rules & Regulation to include issuance of a Yellow Card, it runs foul of it’s own ruling as per Rule 2 (h) :- If the member refuses to apologise or attempts a second offence, the member shall be suspended for a period of time to be determined by the administrator.

Forumer/s who spend time to contribute effectively are also not paid. They too are volunteers who carry out research on someone's posting to response with useful solution. Therefore, Moderators must not keep on insinuating that they're not paid doing volunteer work.

Usj.com Webmaster & Moderators please take note of this phrase :-
Without Forumers support, there won't be an eCommunity such as usj.com.
_____________

JEFF says:

Without Forumers support, there won't be an eCommunity such as usj.com.

Ini cerita basi dah. We heard this five years ago.

[jeffooi]

To Isarahim...

We can take it offline if a debate is called for on a Moderator's role - not onorousm but specifically in the context of USJ.com.my. I am ever ready.

But I have an option to keep it short and simple.

<b>Rule 1:</b> Stick to our Terms and Conditions for the privileged use of the forum here.

<b>Rule 2:</b> If you still have problem, always go back to Rule 1.

[keroncong_asli]

Ceritanya basi tetapi 'message' nya padat.
Hey Jeff, 'Tongkat Ali drink is still on, right ?

JEFF SAYS: Drink offer still on, for sure!

[isarahim]

Jeff,

I fear that you have largely misunderstood what I am saying.


Rule 1: Stick to our Terms and Conditions for the privileged use of the forum here.
Rule 2: If you still have problem, always go back to Rule 1.

The T&Cs and the rules have never been questioned. So why you bring up this here is puzzling. It's a strong indication of how little you understand the points I'm making.

On the contrary, what has been questioned is certain inability to distinguish between on one hand (1.) educated and sensible discussion about one of the central issues underpinning long term racial harmony and on the other hand (2.) various racism loaded flame wars.

My point is that the former is not against the T&Cs, but the latter is. I don't think there would be any problems whatsoever to moderate this difference as long as you understand the difference. But what I hear from you is that you perhaps don't. I hope I'm wrong.

[kwchang]

Let me say something on behalf of Jeff (without his consent).

Isarahim, we understand that it is possible to run an intellectual discussion about anything on Earth, "sensitive issues" included. The crux of the matter is just one keyword and that is maturity.

Even if we have level headed, educated, sensible and "matured" debators, we (unfortunately) do not have similar audiences. Some of the audience do come on stage and shout profanities, thinking racial warfare is the order of the day. Some of the audience with slanted (and perhaps immature outlooks) will cry foul and send the authorities to come on with tear gas canisters cocked and ready to deploy.

Frankly, I do not trust the Malaysian audience have that level of maturity. Be it social maturity, intellectual maturity, what have you. What is frightening is we still have people in our midst with bigotted and racialistic opinions. Pretty heavy chips on their shoulders that out-weigh logical thought. Touch those raw nerves and someone's going to send us into orbit.

If you aspire to be an astronaut, be my guest (but do it elsewhere). My duty is to man this mothership of usj dot com and bring the passengers safely through their journey on the multimedia superhighway and avoid the Klingons.

[isarahim]

Jeff,

I call it intrusion as it is an intrusion, and a very ugly one. Basically you take yourself the right to intrude in my points which is an ugly trick I have never seen in any other forum. Nothing to do with semantics, but rather with the level of moderation of moderators.

From your words, you spoke from a Muslim's individual view, and I, as a non-Muslim, have my reservation over what you have said and what I perceived you have imposed on me with your onorous statement.
Please explain 'imposed'. Do you feel 'imposed' upon from a stated view? And what do you mean by 'onerous'? Should I feel flattered that you find it onerous that I have placed a condition that you should reinstate my postings for me to stay. As you have explained below, you are not interesting in having discussions in this forum regarding matters of importance. And let's be frank; you want to get rid of me anyway, so why complain?

There are many of the likes of you, and many of the likes of me in this cyber-space. If the many likes of YOU were to argue PUBLICLY in this Web Forum with the many likes of ME, there will be no end to conflict of perspectives coming from many YOUs and many MEs.
Why do you always think in the form of conflict? I'm not here for conflict. I'm here for exchange of ideas. What I appreciated with this forum in the past was that this is the only forum where Chinese and Malays do not keep on flaming each other. Here was some very interesting discussions going on, with and without my involvement. And all you can think of is in terms of conflict. Why is discussion synonymous to conflict in your mind? It's clearly not in mine. Conflict was not in my vocabolary until you brought it in.

One of the common grounds is for us to respect each other's value system and to keep it to the inner sanctum of each other's thoughts. We respect mutually, we don't cross impose. It is still an option for the larger good.
I agree. Which is perfectly in line with my line of thoughts too.

It is my wish to uphold this common ground, and it is from this common ground that I said you didn't walk your talk.
Don't put words in my mouth. I have never said that.

Let me repeat: You want the community to comply with your individuality. You worship more of " I " than " WE".
Preposterous. Well, I won't answer it, I don't discuss on that kind of level.

But if you want to change the Malaysian Constitution for all that you believe in - as you have implied that Malaysian Constitution is against the "Words of God", please don't make a sermon out of this web forum.
You're joking. It doesn't matter which reference point you use. Ok, I can say the United Nation's Declaration of Human Rights. I can say the cornerstone of racial harmony. I have used the religious reference point because this issue can only be resolved within the Malay community itself. The Malay conscience has to speak. It's an ongoing debate primarily between Malays.

Please go elsewhere. This ain't the forum, the platform nor the target audience to fight your fight.
If anyone is imposing things on you it's yourself. Since you are the king of the forum you are taking yourself the right to speak on behalf of all others. But that is not consistent with the other feedback I get and you know it.

In fact I'm very appreciative of all the positive feedback and also all the educated and sensible discussions which have been taking place. I feel there has been a common cross-DNA consensus growing and I have personally learnt a lot. In addition I feel very happy that some posters, both Chinese and Malay, have sent me messages saying that my postings have helped in bridging a lot of misunderstandings.

It's just sad to hear that the king of the forum (Jeff Ooi: accent is mine, see reply below) now has made it clear that he has a completely different view; claiming that he thinks I have some kind of private agenda.

<font size="+1"><font color="red">To Isarahim</font></font>

<b><font color="red">You said:</font></b>

It's just sad to hear that the king of the forum now has made it clear that he has a completely different view; claiming that he thinks I have some kind of private agenda.

<b><font color="red">I am using my privilege as the Administrator to put a specific context at the right places:

You distorted the goodwill we collectively gained and collectively built over the last five years with a private agenda best known to yourself.

You intentionally imposed the description 'King of the forum' on someone, a description that - in the first place - was NEVER ( 1 ) self-bestwoed ( 2 ) publicly acclaimed ( 3 ) relevant to the discussion pertinent to this thread.

That says you.</font></b>

[isarahim]

If you aspire to be an astronaut, be my guest (but do it elsewhere). My duty is to man this mothership of usj dot com and bring the passengers safely through their journey on the multimedia superhighway and avoid the Klingons.

As I told Jeff earlier, this is not the feedback I'm getting from posters. On the contrary, these issues will keep on popping up with our without my involvement. Instead you should appreciate that I'm trying to keep these discussions on an educated and sensible level. With me and some other posters gone you will lose the guests which bring the forum beyond material & gossip matters. And the site will be in real trouble. The flame war agents will stay on. The sensible posters will disappear - as they have been doing for a long time already. And your moderator burden will increase.

[kwchang]

My apologies Isarahim, when I said "you" I mean to refer to anyone else that are of similar opinion as you. I have nothing personal against you. My foremost concern is the mothership as I had said earlier.

I understand the loss. If the intellectuals insist on issues of race and religion while we are traversing our current minefield, we have no choice if they wish to leave. We'd rather be safe than allow someone to activate a mine.

[ivanhow]

Hi Guys,
May I intrude a little here?
As a forumer, I feel that this tread is not getting any one anywhere.

My suggestion is:
Why not, go and have a teh tarik session, and have a chit-chat? That may straighten things a bit, and cool things a bit. Be sure no one gets a black-eye, or some one will have to stand bail!

Let this be a friendly one, to seek understanding - OK guys?

[isarahim]

KW,

Thanks for the apology. I don't have anything personally against either you or Jeff. Of course I'm fully aware of the situation you're coming from. I did seriously feel for a while that you seemed to be in support of those that attempted to transform the discussions we had into flame wars. Perhaps I was wrong on this account. But I think that at least Jeff still as a quite blur idea about the real threats to his forum. I would suggest that the real threat to this forum is not the exchange of ideas that I and others are expressing, but rather the inflammatory flame wars. And you need to fully understand the difference. If you remove the former but keep the latter you will be in deeper problems than before. And those that rather like to find ways to bridge the divide are gone. Because, this strategem means that you will only have the flame war mongers left. Fine if that's what you want. But this means that instead of supporting racial harmony you are - indirectly - fuelling disharmony. Isn't that where the real minefield is? I think so.

[isarahim]

I am using my privilege as the Administrator to put a specific context at the right places:
As if I didn't know. But you can do it using normal posting standards and not disrupt other people's lines.

<font color="red"><b>To Isarahim:</b>

<font size="+1">READ MY LIPS:

"I am using my privilege as the Administrator to put a specific context at the right places."</font></font>


You distorted the goodwill we collectively gained and collectively built over the last five years with a private agenda.
Really? I think only you believe that. Prove it!


You intentionally imposed the description 'King of the forum' on someone that was NEVER ( 1 ) self-bestwoed ( 2 ) publicly acclaimed ( 3 ) relevant to the discussion pertinent to this thread.
You spoke on behalf of the other posters. That's why. And it's painfully relevant.

[jeffooi]

<font size="+1">Just to set the record straight:</font>

Forumer Isarahim said this (<a href="http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showpost.php?p=40379&postcount=22">Reply #22</a> on 19-11-2004, 08:58 PM via IP: 210.195.36.5) :


Malaysia, on the other hand, is a country with elements of racism inscribed into the constitution and its laws. This is an element of eternal sensitivity, not the least because Islam is Malaysia's state religion, and in Islam any form of racism is illegal. So the constitution of Malaysia is, no matter whether you wish to pretend otherwise or not, fundamentally at odds with the words of God...

While admitting that racism is an element of eternal sensitivity, Isarahim pursued it with claims that are slanted with individualistic, personal belief by stating that "constitution of Malaysia is... fundamentally at odds with the words of God".

Read in its entirety, USJ.com.my deems this an inflammatory statement and, as such, this community portal does not condone it to be repeated anywhere in this forum.

More importantly, this Forum disclaims its association in whatsoever way with Isarahim's views quoted above.

In addition, forumer Isarahim said this (<a href="http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showpost.php?p=40437&postcount=28">Reply #28</a> on 20-11-2004, 12:02 PM via IP: 210.195.36.101) :


Quote:
a ) Keluhuran Perlembagaan
b ) Kedaulatan Undang-undang
c ) Kesopanan dan Kesusilaan

I subscribe to these as much as you do. And may I ask what is the conflict?

Isarahim proclaimed that ( 1 ) the Malaysian Constitution is "fundamentally at odds with the words of God", and at the same time, ( 2 ) professed to be subscribing to the tenets of the Rukunegara, including the one on Keluhuran Perlembagaan.

Evidently, the two statements - published on separate occasions but when read together - are mutually exclusive and conflicting in essence.

If it could get a perpetrating forumer to conflict with his own thoughts, we have NO GUARANTEE that a forumer's conflicting thoughts will not confuse other forum participants and cause mayhem in this cyber-space.

However, by making use of this Forum to cast aspersion on the Malaysian law and belief system is an outright abuse of the privilege accorded to the community who populate this forum.

USJ.com.my does not condone such conflicting statements about Malaysian conventions and institution, and for them to be discoloured in anyway by people like Isarahim; and more specifically, for such statements to be disseminated publicly and electronically via this forum.

We CAN'T GUARANTEE that discussions on racism - like what Isarahim has attempted - will not be misconstrued by any party and the powers-that-be.

Our final advice to Isarahim is this:

If you want to change the Malaysian Constitution for all that you believe in - as you have implied that Malaysian Constitution is against the "Words of God", please don't make a sermon out of this web forum.

Please take your fight elsewhere.

Or better still, start you own web forum to pursue it to your fullest agenda and at your absolute pleasure. Partake this challenge and we wish you all the best.

Any defiance hereafter in this web forum will attract a sanction against you as a Forum user in this portal.

JEFF OOI

[isarahim]

Jeff,

Let me just round off with:

I have never ever started any thread in this forum with race based content. I have started a few threads, but none of them have been in any topics related to race discussed herein.

<font color="red">JEFF SAYS: Don't digress from the main point we fault you.

You said... "Malaysian constitution is fundamantally against the words of God".

We said NO!

We said your statement on our Constitution is inflammatory. (See <a href="http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showpost.php?p=40477&postcount=40">Reply #40</a> of this thread.)

And we said you shouldn't make a sermon out of this forum.</font>

However, I have filled in with - to my best efforts - thoughts which serve to promote understanding. Yes I have debated certain matters, but with the sole attempt to promote this understanding. That is my sole private agenda.

As for the statements about contradictions and conflict. I don't want to debate this again. I have made my points. Obviously I have a totally opposite view and people can chose to agree and/or disagree.

<font color="red">JEFF OOI: The notion of "agreeing to diagree" is a universal value. But we also said that we - as the Moderators of this forum - do not agree with what you said. We have also repeatedly and patiently advised you not to perpetrate your flavour/definition of racism in this forum.

Verily, we also said that we have NO GUARANTEE that such derogatory statements of yours about our "Malaysian Constitution being fundamentally against the words of God" - as had been disseminated electronically through this web portal - will not be misconstrued by any party and the powers-that-be in this country.

You should be responsible enough to think of the harm you may cause to the larger good as represented by this community portal that we've built over the last 5 years, with or without you.</font>

As for Jeff's latest outburst, <font color="red">(JEFF SAYS: Outburst? You are putting words in my mouth. I am protecting the interest of this Web Forum as an interested party, especially as its founder and administrator.)</font> I'm of course both surprised and disappointed. But that's OK, he'll learn. We all learn.

<font color="red">JEFF SAYS: Our respect to you is this: Be bold to say what you want to say about Malaysian Constitution, and even racism - which you said has rendered our Constitution fundamentally against the words of God.</font>

But you have to start your own forum elsewhere - definitely not USJ.com.my - to propagate your belief.

<font color="red">Do it. Don't disappoint us and don't lose our respect for you on this.

Then we will see that we all learn together.</font>

[mackzulkifli]

There is something very wrong when a neighbourhood forum becomes and idealogical battleground. I think I am of sound mind and logical thought. My only conclusion of this is that Isa Rahim is a highly intelligent but slightly far sighted individual.

When we set our eyes to the horizon, we often don't see what's coming at us right in front of our eyes. I would like to say that each is right in his own way, which would be the normality of my character. I however am inclined to do otherwise. Why? Because Isa is wrong. He is very wrong.

Not in what he says, on the contrary, I have much admiration fgor the essence of what is being said. I just find the tone and manner, the place and the blatant display of intellectual privelege overly condascending.

We are simple people, trying to solve simple problems. Like snatch thieves, potholes and a better quality of life, promised to us by the constituency we live in.

Really, what the constitution relates to spirituality is a higher order that DOES NOT require our immediate attention.The rights invoked within the forum IS NOT infallible, as nothing is truly free of prejudice and no one is completely disconnected from obligations. Which brings me to a point I will try to make. When in the forum, you are obligated to abide by the conditions applied by the moderators.

If you have a problem with your house, your drains, your roads, your neighbours or even your assemblyman, I am sure the valid complaints will be met with much show of support and assistance here.

However, do you honestly think that this is the place for discussions about racial, overtly political and spiritual/religious content. Visualise this as the neighbourhood discussion centre about the neighbourhood. If it interests us, occasionally we may sidetrack. Otherwise, we are obligated to not raise sensitive issues here. Intelligence is power, diplomacy is the choice of intellects. No one wins when the battle lines are dynamic. And winning is over rated. What do we gain?

There are times when I feel that something just needs to be said about matters in here. This is one of them. Lay of the hostilities (yes, they are there, don't claim this was friendly, it was anything but that) and even if you have a great point of view, true intelligence is the art of merging them with a totally opposite idea and finding a common ground. Dogs fight, humanity invokes a higher thinking of winning by knowing when not to fight.

Personally, I think I will strike of great with Isa. Here, I feel that perhaps less IQ and more EQ is the flavour of the moment. Until a time when we can convincingly say to ourselves, listen to him first then make up my mind. Which, apparently not many can. I myself suffer from this weakness, for which I employ tight self censorship.

Thanks.

[shali]

Prosecution for seditious statements are serious matters and that's why the sanction of the Public Prosecutor is mandatory under the law.

And I was a Deputy Public Prosecutor before :eek: . I have had the opportunity of discussing and branstorming with my peers on when and how to prosecute such cases, if at all. The guiding principles was and still is this: look at all the circumstances of the case without also failing to look at the "justice of the case", for the Constitution starts off with A RIGHT to free speech, followed by the Exceptions. I tell you this much - if we follow the Exceptions all the time (rather than the rule itself), we need to cut down drastically the syllabus in many law and political science faculties in this country. The system itself will break down and we will start producing donkey political scientists and lawyers. We do give some latitude if we feel public policy justly demands it having regard "to all the circumstances of each case".

I have seen far more dangerous statements in this forum (but which are openly and heatedly argued in law lectures and tutorials all over - Tun Haniff Omar knew it, he was my senior in UK). But in the final analysis, this is not a judicial matter - and Isa may well win even without a Queens Counsel :D

It this little skirmish, it's simply boils down to complying with the terms of this forum for which the Administrators/moderators must have the final say :cool:

[aroki]

have been reading this exchanges with interest from spore over the weekend.

Shali said it well..like any clubs or parties etc that we join ..there are rules and regulations which we need to follow. In usj.com it is the same and we need to abide by the rules. However any clubs etc without it members, is nothing(i know it is basi but still relevant) unless the founders want to keep it exclusive by invitation or acceptance based on locality or qualifications. If no such requirements exist, than anyone who accepts the rules are accepted without any discrimination.However members who can't accept the rules, should also consider taking their views somewhere else.

That said, I don't think anyone with a sound mind will want to put usj.com in trouble.We are part of usj.com(even if are not founders) and want to see it succeed and go on as long as it can.of course founders are more passionate of it as it is their baby.

As for those who keep saying this is non paying job and bla bla( a bit basilah) in administrating...guess there is always a choice not to do it..this job is for volunteers which I'm sure was very clear from the start when one steps up to it. That being said, it doesn't mean the effort is not appreciated..at least for me it is good to have someone tell me..hei get back to the topic...or get someone else back to the topic, so things can proceed smoothly.. Administrators..thank you. I can buy TT with ginseng..just let me know when. :cool:

we are here to share ideas and opinions, so lets continue doing that in a civilise manner and have a win win situation for all of us and usj.com. :)

[kwchang]

What can I say?

I am indeed overwhelmed by all your comments (Isarahim's included). In a way I am very happy to see the level of maturity of discussion and how each of you took your turn to carry your points. There was a noticeable absence of arguement from the bystanders. For a moment, I sensed the Utopia that Isarahim was fighting for.

However, we will stick by our stand in being sensitive to issues of race and religion. We shall stay clear of taunting the laws and our constitution. Let the lawyers do that within their law lectures which happen to be closed door affairs, I believe, and hence safe from harming the general public.

Mackzulkifli, may I congratulate you for your eloquent passage. Thank you for putting it all in perspective. We couldn't have done better. It also shows that by taking a step back and resist getting into the fray too early, one has the privilege of time to collect one's thoughts and avoid confrontational comments. I am learning every day.

As for Aroki and others who think that i sound like a cracked record, I am glad you heard. I do hope you got what I was really saying.

I think Isarahim did not get what Jeff was trying to say. I wonder if anyone understood why Jeff interjected like he did? He had a reason for doing that. Sometimes, by concentrating on the fine points, we may miss the whole picture. I am quite sure Isarahim did (miss the picture). Hence we excuse him for his stand. I am sure some of you understood Jeff's actions. For those who don't, do step back and look at it in its entirety and you just might see the broad picture. Don't worry if you don't - there won't be a quiz at the end of all this.

Like what some of you had already mentioned, let us get on with the Forum. This is for the community and let us (the community) maintain this neighbourhood for ourselves (i.e. members of the Forum).

[aroki]

I think Isarahim did not get what Jeff was trying to say. I wonder if anyone understood why Jeff interjected like he did? He had a reason for doing that. Sometimes, by concentrating on the fine points, we may miss the whole picture. I am quite sure Isarahim did (miss the picture). Hence we excuse him for his stand. I am sure some of you understood Jeff's actions. For those who don't, do step back and look at it in its entirety and you just might see the broad picture. Don't worry if you don't - there won't be a quiz at the end of all this.

kw - I can't speak for the rest but got what you said and I hope you got what I said.

On the above first you seem to wonder if anyone understood, than you're sure some of us understood.. :confused: ..and you say we excuse him..who is we? as you clearly said most us had the luxury of watching this and taking many steps back before saying our two cents..well we did, as seen from the postings..and we were not emotionally involved. And at the end, if some of us did understand..great and if some of us didn't ..so be it...it's not the end of the world..you never going to get everyone to understand on all the issues even if there is going to be a quiz.

Most posting after you,jeff and Isa are supportive of the rules in usj..we are supportive in having rules that govern this forum..lets get on like you said.

cao. :)

[jand]

i find isarahim's points to be logical and heartening to know that some bumiputeras would exercise their right not to use their privilege.

i agree whole heartedly that there are changes needed but change is never an easy one to swallow if history is anything to by.

this particular context is very similar to the American Civil War where the idea to free southern slaves is indeed very enlightened however the implementation leaves much to be desired and it is this very one that I believe the administrator is very much worried of.
We don't need a civil war, we will never gain from it and infact, it would be a scar bigger than the one we already had from before.

This matter cannot be resolved by the 'nons' but only internally within themselves as it's a 'family matter'. But if what was said is true, the seeds of change is already there. Let evolution take its own path and pace. And how do we implement it? We follow Gandhi's tenets.

We may not be brothers of the blood but at the very least we are half brothers from this land that nurtured us and let no one take that away from any of us.